Beyond the bias within this specific Guardian analysis, the truth is that UK media coverage of negotiations similarly suffers from the failure to take Israeli concerns seriously – rational fears born of the failure of past territorial withdrawals to bring peace, and a refusal to ignore the reactionary Palestinian political culture which – most Israeli believe – lays at the root of the conflict.
Earlier today, we heard back from Sky producers, informing us that they upheld our complaint and thanked us for bringing the information to their attention – particularly the AP correction.
CAMERA and other watchdog groups have refuted Adalah’s claims that there are 50 “racist laws” in Israel – a term used so carelessly by the NGO that even an Israeli public health law requiring that parents vaccinate their children is bizarrely included on their list of “racist laws”.
However you want to characterise demographic changes in the holy city since 1967, the implicit suggestion that Palestinians have been or are currently being ethnically cleansed in Jerusalem (or anywhere else in Israel for that matter) is the opposite of the truth.
By turning a complex and vexing political dispute into a binary moral paradigm, reducing the historical and diplomatic complexities of a more than 100 year-long conflict to one territorial dispute, and dismissing authentic, historically-informed Israeli fears of Palestinian intentions as nothing more than a failure of empathy and imagination, Emily Hilton is certainly not “challenging narratives”.
Yesterday, we posted and tweeted about the following egregious error in a report at The Telegraph on the scandal surrounding comments by a low-level Israeli employee, Shai Masot, uncovered by an Al […]
Al Jazeera on Sunday published “bombshell footage” covertly filmed in a West London restaurant involving Shai Masot, a political officer at the Israeli embassy, and Maria Strizzola, a civil servant and former aide […]
Yesterday, most major UK news outlets were quick to report on the guilty verdict of Israeli soldier Elor Azaria, convicted in a military court for shooting to death a wounded Palestinian attacker, Abdel […]
Yesterday, we posted about an inaccurate headline accompanying a Jan. 1st Times of London article by Gregg Carlstrom. We demonstrated that no Israeli settlers – according to the text of the actual article […]
Here’s the headline accompanying a Jan. 1st Times of London article by Gregg Carlstrom. There are two elements of the headline that are interesting. First, the article primarily deals with Palestinian complaints […]
At this time, we’d like to wish all of those who follow us – those (both friend and ‘foe’) who read the blog, comment below the line, follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook – […]
Among those objecting to the government’s decision to adopt the Working Definition of Antisemitism were a group of anti-Zionists in the UK (such as Tony Greenstein) whose letter – accusing British Jews of falsely crying antisemitism to silence debate about Israel – appeared in the Guardian on Dec. 17th.
Subsequent U.S. administrations – through Obama – have maintained the same position. Though they’ve obviously disapproved of Israeli construction across the green line, they did not label them as “illegal”.
The wording of the Indy’s poll is extremely misleading, as it suggests that the mere criticism of Israel is defined as antisemitic by the WD. However, as the WD adopted by Theresa May makes perfectly clear, mere criticism of Israel is absolutely NOT considered antisemitic.
The Guardian, The Sun, The Telegraph, The Spectator, the Evening Standard and the Daily Mail all reported on Jeremy Corbyn’s controversial appointment of Jayne Fisher, a former Sinn Fein staffer who worked for Gerry […]
Indy op-ed on UK position that ‘Opposing Israel’s existence = antisemitism’ penned by guy opposed to Israel’s existence
Criticism of the Jewish state becomes antisemitic when it holds the state to a moral standard no other state is held to, and when it evokes historic antisemitic tropes and narratives – such as the view that Jews (individually or collectively) represent a uniquely malevolent force in the world, an “organic obstacle [to] peace and progress”.
This morning, multiple news outlets reported that the British government will adopt the Working Definition of Antisemitism. Downing Street said that the WD would assist “in efforts to fight hate crimes and incitement targeting Jews” and by ensuring that “culprits will not be able to get away with being antisemitic because the term is ill-defined, or because different organisations or bodies have different interpretations of it”.
Even if you are not convinced that the Zionism = Racism canard is not antisemitic in intent, it is undeniably antisemitic in effect, because such a characterization necessarily means that Jews (the overwhelming majority of whom are Zionists) support a racist ideology.
If the Guardian journalist had done some fact checking, he would have easily found such evidence clearly contradicting the WCC spokesperson’s claims that they have “no connection to BDS”.
The Independent continues to lead the British media pack when it comes to story selections designed to paint Israel in the worst possible light. Here’s a recent example from the Indy’s Israel page of two stories published within a day of each other which each focusing on sexual attitudes within Israeli society.